Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 397, Issue 1, pp 357–367 | Cite as

Identification of additives in poly(vinylacetate) artist’s paints using PY-GC-MS

  • Miguel F. Silva
  • Maria Teresa Doménech-Carbó
  • Laura Fuster-López
  • Marion F. Mecklenburg
  • Susana Martin-Rey
Original Paper

Abstract

Commercial poly(vinyl acetate) (PVAc) paint formulations for artists include a number of compounds in addition to the PVAc polymer and pigments to improve the physical and chemical properties of the resulting product. Among the most common additives are surfactants, coalescing agents, defoamers, freeze–thaw agents and thickeners. These products significantly influence the behaviour of the dried film. Nevertheless, they are usually difficult to detect with conventional analytical methods given their low concentration. In order to identify these additives, present in the dried film as minor components, an analytical method based on in situ thermally assisted pyrolysis–silylation gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS) using hexamethyldisilazane as a derivatisation reagent is proposed. This method improves the conventional GC-MS analysis performed by direct pyrolysis and enables the simultaneous identification of the PVAc binding medium and the additives included by the manufacturer in the commercial paint. Five different commercial PVAc paints have been analysed, namely, armour green, burnt umber, oriental red, raw umber and white from Flashe®. Internal plasticiser VeoVa consisting of C10 fatty acids with highly branched chains has been recognised from the MS spectra. On the other hand, the differences found in the additive content of the studied paints, in particular the poly(ethylene glycol)-type surfactant, are in good agreement with their mechanical properties.

Figure

Picture of armour green Flashe® paint sample breaking in the mechanical tester’s gauge. The photo evidences the type of break these samples experience. Rather than a clean break, the sample experiences several simultaneous fractures with a saw-tooth-like pattern

Keywords

Paints PVAc Additives PEG Py-GC-MS HMDS 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Financial support is gratefully acknowledged from the Spanish “I+D+I MICINN” project CTQ2008-06727-C03-01/BQU supported by ERDEF funds as well as the “Generalitat Valenciana” I+D project ACOMP/2009/171 and the AP2006-3223 project ascribed to the program of predoctoral stages of university professors and researchers in Spanish universities and research centres from the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (MICINN). Tensile strength testers of the Smithsonian Institution, Museum Conservation Institute are gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Croll S (2006) In: Learner T, Smithen P, Krueger JW, and Schiling MR (eds) Modern Paints Uncovered Symposium, 16–19 May 2006, Tate Modern, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    TATE (2004) A literature review in Tate Modern online research papers. http://www.tate.org.uk/research/tateresearch/tatepapers/04autumn/jablonski.htm. Accessed 15 July 2009
  3. 3.
    Learner T (2004) Analysis of modern paints. Getty, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Whitmore PM, Colaluca VG, Morris HR, Eugene F (1996) Stud Conserv 41:250–255Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hellgren AC, Weissenborn P, Holmberg K (1999) Prog Org Coat 35:79–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Butler LN, Fellows CM, Gilbert RG (2005) Prog Org Coat 53:112–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nimkulrat S, Suchiva K, Phinyocheep P, Puttipipatkhachorn S (2004) International J Pharm 287:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dennis G, Anderson (1997) Coat Anal Chem 69:15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scalarone D, Lazzari M, Castelvetro V, Chiantore O (2007) Chem Mater 19:6107–6113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smith G (2006) Aging. In: Learner T, Smithen P, Krueger JW, Schiling MR (eds) Modern Paints Uncovered Symposium, 16–19 May 2006, Tate Modern, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ormsby BA, Learner T, Foster GM, Druzik JR, Schilling MR (2006) In: Learner T, Smithen P, Krueger JW, Schiling MR (eds) Modern Paints Uncovered Symposium, 16–19 May 2006, Tate Modern, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chiantore O, Scalarone D (2004) J Sep Sci 27:263–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith GA (2005) In: Verger I (ed) 14th Triennial Meeting, The Hague, 12–16 September 2005: Preprints (ICOM Committee for Conservation) James and James Earthscan Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoogland FG, Boon JJ (2009) Intern J Mass Spectrom 284:72–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoogland FG, Boon JJ (2009) Intern J Mass Spectrom 284:66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Silva MF, Doménech-Carbó MT, Fuster-Lopez L, Martin-Rey S, Mecklenburg M (2009) F J. Anal Appl Pyrolysis 85:487–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nakamura S, Takino M, Shigeki D (2001) J Chromatogr A 912:329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sonoda N, Rioux JP (1990) Stud Conserv 35:189–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Learner T (2001) Stud Conserv 46:225–241Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Osete-Cortina L, Doménech-Carbó MT (2006) J Chromatogr A 1127:228–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Doménech-Carbó MT, Bitossi G, Osete-Cortina L, Cruz-Cañizares J, Yusá-Marco D (2008) J Anal Bioanal Chem 391:1371–1379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    C-Y WF (2000) J Chromatogr A 883:199–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wampler T P, Bishea G A, Simonsick W J (1997) J Anal Appl Pyrolysis, 40–41Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    C-Y WF (2000) J Chromatogr A 886:225–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    C-Y WF (2000) J Chromatogr A 891:313–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang FC-Y (2000) J Chromatogr A 891:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Coulier L, Kaal ER, Tienstra M, Hankemeier T (2005) J Chromatogr A 1062:227–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Blazsó M (2001) J Anal Appl Py 58-59:29–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Boutin M, Lesage J, Ostiguy C, Bertrand MJ (2004) J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 15:1315–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Doménech-Carbó MT (2008) Anal Chim Acta 621:109–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chiavari G, Fabbri D, Prati S (2001) Chromatographia 53:311–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Slinckx MMCP, Scholten HPH (1994) J Oil Col Chem Assoc 77:107–112Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gross JH (2004) Mass spectrometry. Springer, Berlin, p 267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lin ZK, Li SF (2008) European Polym J 44:645–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zumbül S, Attanasio F, Scherrer N C, Müller W, Fenner N, Carasi W (2006) In: Learner T, Smithen P, Krueger JW, Schiling MR (eds) Modern Paints Uncovered Symposium, 16–19 May 2006, Tate Modern, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Erlebacher JD, Mecklenburg MF, Tumosa CS (1992) In: 204th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Washington DC, Polymer Preprints 33(2):646–647Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel F. Silva
    • 1
  • Maria Teresa Doménech-Carbó
    • 1
  • Laura Fuster-López
    • 1
  • Marion F. Mecklenburg
    • 2
  • Susana Martin-Rey
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto de Restauración del PatrimonioUniversidad Politécnica de ValenciaValenciaSpain
  2. 2.Museum Conservation InstituteSmithsonian InstitutionSuitlandUSA

Personalised recommendations